E72( 



Sp€€di (p 



Wfv ChArl^ E Cechva/1 



LIBRARV OF 



CONGRESS 



013 902 140 A 



HoUinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



C66 



Copy 1 




Nothing Sliort of a Notice to S])a!u to Ouit the Western 

Hemi!<i>liere >vill Moot tiie llequire- 

lueiits of the Situation. 



SPEECH 



IIOX. CHARLES r. COCHRAN, 

OF MISSOURI, 

In the House of Eepeesentatives, 

Wednesday, March IG, ISOS. 

The House loeing in Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, 
and having under consideration the bill (H. R. 9008) making appropriations 
for the service of the Post-Office Department for the fiscal year ending June 
SO, 1899— 

Mr. COCHRAN of Missonri said: 

Mr. Chairman: We live in an age in wliicli nations deal in high- 
sonnding maxims of morality and indulge in practices which 
Nero would have spurned. Proclaimizig as the shibboleth of ad- 
vanced civilization, "peace on earth, good will to men," the great 
powers of Christendom propose arbitration as a method of com- 
posing differences among themselves, while devising, each for 
itself and by the consent of all, a programme of cold-blooded, 
wholesale robbery of weak nations and peoples by the more 
powerful. 

Contemporaneous with ceaseless preaching of the propaganda 
of perpetual peace, we witness on land the assemblage of armies 
numerically the largest known to the history of the world, armed 
with engines of destruction and death-dealing instruments hith- 
erto unknown, and on the seas fleets of monster war ships capable 
of destroying in an hour the creations of centuries of labor. And 
what mean these vast preparations for armed conflict? 

According to the teachings of statesmen who are continually 
telling us this is the age of arbitration and universal peace, they 
are aimless; but, Mr. Chairman, actions speak louder than words. 
These fleets and armies are being used to overawe and despoil the 
weaker members of the family of nations, and when the people 
demand their use for nobler purposes, governments are held in 
restraint by stockjobbers and speculators, who stifle every war- 
like movement that has not for its object the promotion of merce- 
nary ends. 

Mr. Chairman, in the recent past we have seen diplomacy bind 
the hands of Christendom while the Turks executed the vengeance 
of demons upon the Armenians— destroying temples of worship, 
converting prosperous regions into a wilderness, reducing the 
habitations of the people into tenantless ruins, and consigning a 
vast multitude of men, women, and children to bloody graves. 

We have witnessed a coalition of great powers girdling the 
Island of Crete with war ships to prevent the Greeks from going 
3173 1 



Xu 



68016 



-<5r 

^ Co 

v.* to the rescue of the Cretan Christians, who for so many years have 
suffered the horrors of Turkish rule. 
^' Fresh in the recollection of lovers of liberty everywhere is the 

narrow escape of the Boer Republic from destruction, planned 
jA and desperately attempted by British adventurers engaged in the 

"^^ exploitation of the wealth of plundered Africa, and as we sit here 

half a dozen great nations are engaged in the pastime of dismem- 
bering the venerable Chinese Empire. 

Mr. Chairman, such are the deeds, such the achievements, of 
those who, in the Old World, reecho the platitudes by which, in 
this free country, the maudlin pretense of aversion to violence 
and bloodshed has been used as an excuse for the actual partici- 
pation of our Navy in a war of extermination waged by commis- 
sioned assassins against a race whose only crime is the love of 
liberty and heroic resistance of oppression. And what in the eyes 
of Americans adds to the disgrace of this repulsive spectacle is the 
knowledge that corporation mongers and gamblers who thrive by 
studying the stock ticker in London and New York have the ear 
of the Government and are more influential in shaping public 
policies than the united and solemn voice of the people, and that 
it is the exercise of their pernicious influence that has brought 
about the nation's degTadation. 

I call the attention of this House and of the country to the fact 
that for more than a year, iipon this side of the Chamber, the de- 
mand for the recognition of the belligerent rights of the Cuban 
patriots has been incessantly made, and to the further fact that, in 
order to evade performance of that plain duty, every subterfuge 
possible to be invented has been resorted to by the Republican 
majority in this body. The law has been perverted. The notori- 
ous facts of history have been denied. 

For over two years the policy of our Government in reference 
to the war in Cuba has been controlled by the subsidized press and 
the corporation managers, and the people know it. They know 
also, Mr. Chairman, that if at last the Hannaized Administration 
grudgingly approaches compliance with the will of the people, it 
is because"the Republicans in this body, who for a whole year have 
supinely permitted Hannaism to hold full sway, have become 
alarmed at the anger of the people and demanded of the President 
a reversal of the policy of the Government, not for the purpose of 
saving the nation from dishonor and rescuing Cuba from destruc- 
tion, but in order to prevent the annihilation of the Republican 
party at the polls next November, 

Mr. Chairman, nothing that has recently transpired will erase 
from the minds of the American people the ugly impression made 
by the surrender of the Presidential office to the control of Mark 
Hanna and his associates. The country has not been deceived by 
the subterfuges by which two Presidents— first Mr. Cleveland and 
afterwards his successor— have sought to obscure the true cause of 
the policy pursued by our Government in reference to the Cuban 
question. 

The people know that it is the paramount influence of the bond- 
holders and stockjobbers of London and New York that has 
caused two Administrations to refuse the recognition of Cuban 
belligerencv. They know that for three years this country has 
acted as the ally of Spain in the war of extermination which has 
converted the Island of Cuba into a sepulcher in which are en- 
tombed over half a million victims of willful assassination. Noth- 
ing can expiate the fault that has made this Republic an accom- 
tl73 






plice of the brutal dynasty which on the eve of its dissolution 
and destruction has capped the climax of centuries of infamy by 
deliberately planning and fiendishly consummating the murder of 
a race. 

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire what has recently occurred to 
silence the gentlemen who, only a few weeks ago, on this floor 
and at the other end of the Capitol, were revamping the quibbles 
and pretenses by which the McKinley Administration has 
attempted to Justify its policy— quibbles, sir, founded on deliber- 
ate misstatement of the law and the gross perversion of current 
history? 

Indisputably, prior to the destruction of the Maine, there was 
no sign of an intention of the Administration to go to the help of 
the Cubans. On the contrary, we know that until the Maine dis- 
aster upset all calculations, an early adjournment of Congress had 
been planned. It was feared that the bosses might lose control of 
the Republican side of this House. A few Republicans might 
slip their muzzles, join the Democrats, and precipitate a crisis. 
Therefore the programme was to hasten the day of adjournment. 
The Maine disaster alone prevented the consummation of this 
IH'ogramme. 

We know that with a Senate resolution recognizing belligerency 
pending in this body for a year, action. has been prevented. The 
President has refused to act, and his representatives on this floor 
have prevented the House from acting. The House of Represent- 
atives as well as the Executive has listened to the stock jobbers, 
while, almost within sight of our shores, the fairest island on the 
footstool has been the scene of ruthless and savage butchery of 
the bravest people that ever fought for human rights. 

As evidencing the paltry methods used to execute this ignoble 
policy, I call attention to the use made of a message sent to Con- 
gress by President Grant during the former Cuban insurrection, 
part of which was incorporated into President McKinley's Decem- 
ber message, and afSrm that deliberate and willful misconstruc- 
tion of the Grant message has been made the basis of the defense 
most relied upon by the apologists of the present Administration. 
It is my purpose to-day to remove the mask thus improvised by 
showing conclusively that for two years our Government has 
denied the recognition of Cuban belligerency, not because it was 
forbidden by the law of nations, but in violation of every syllable 
of international law applicable to the case. 

When the diplomatic appropriation bill was up for discussion 
under the five-minute rule, I had a few words to say on this sub- 
ject. I then called attention to the fact that it had been argued 
by the President and his apologists in Congress that the existence 
of an organized civil government, located at a permanent capital 
and exercising throughout a considerable area the powers of sov- 
ereignty—collecting taxes, administering justice, etc.— is an essen- 
tial condition precedent to the lawfulness of the recognition of the 
Cuban revolutionary forces as a belligerent power. 

I declared the position untenable, and gave notice that later I 
would submit authorities proving that it has no foundation in in- 
ternational law, but that, on the contrary, even though no civil 
government at all had been organized, the conditions existing on 
the island and which have existed there for over two years have 
throughout that period not only been such as to justify, but such 
as to demand recognition of the belligerency of the Cuban patriots. 

In the limited time at my disposal I can not comment at length 
3K3 



4 

Tipon the authorities, but, in my judgment, comment is unneces- 
sary. 

I lay down as an incontrovertible proposition, sustained by all 
the great writers on the subject, that in order to justify the recog- 
nition of belligerency it is only necessary that there exist on the 
island a condition of public war, and invite attention to the author- 
ities I shall cite to support this position. 

Before reading the authorities I beg to acknowledge obligations 
to a distingiiisiied Republican member of this body [Mr. Wm. 
Alden Smith] who, over two years ago, presented to the House a 
respectable array of authorities going to sustain the position I am 
contending for to-day. I include the fruits of the gentleman's 
labor in the list of quotations from the great writers which I now 
submit. 

Manning's Law of Nations lays down this proposition, which, 
in mj^ judgment, is so firmly grounded in reason and common 
sense that its soundness will not be called in question: 

The concession of belligerent rights may, at a certain epoch of the strife, 
be claimed both in the interest of humanity and of neutral states. There 
always, indeed, arrives a moment at which such a concession is made (as in 
the case of the late Southern insurrection in the United States) by the very 
government against which the revolt takes place. 

Discussing the point at which, under the foregoing rule, a for- 
eign state should extend recognition of belligerency, Mr. Man- 
ning says: 

It mxist be neither so premature as to embarrass a friendly government 
in suppressing what may prove only a transient or partial display of disorder 
or treachery, nor, on the other hand, so dilatory as to protract the incon- 
veniences and cruelty incident to a contest conducted on a large scale apart 
from all the humane alleviations which the l3,ws of civilized war have intro- 
duced. 

In the prize cases (3 Black, Supreme Court Reports) Judge 
Qrier says: 

A civil war is never solemnly declared. It becomes such by accident. The 
power and organization of the persons who originate and carry it on, when 
the party in rebellion occupy and hold in a hostile manner a certain portion 
of territory, have declared their independence and cast off their allegiance, 
and have organized armies, commenced hostilities against their former sov- 
ereign, the world acknowledges them as belligerents and the contest as war. 

In discussing the recognition of belligerency of the Confederate 
States by Great Britain and the grounds upon which the step was 
taken, Earl Russell pointed out that nearly 100,000 troops had 
been placed in the field by the Federal Government, and com- 
mented as follows: 

After a recital of these immense efforts it seems quite inappropriate to 
speak of unlawful combinations. When considering the case of the Greek 
revolutionists, Mr. Canning said that the character of belligerency is not so 
much a principle as a fact; that a certain degree of force and consistency ac- 
quired by a mass of population engaged in war entitled that population to be 
treated as belligerents. Even if their right was questionable, it was to the 
interest of nations, well understood, to so treat them. 

Bluntschli thus distinguishes a revolutionary, military force 
from a lawless and criminal revolt against the sovereign power: 

Every struggle with an armed band, even when it may be organizedin a 
military manner, is not a war. When, in southern Italy, brigands form 
themselves into armed troops, regularly commanded, and give battle to the 
Government troops, they do not for that reason constitute a belligerent 
party, but only bands of malefactors. The distinction rest upon this— that 
•war is a political struggle, engaged in for political ends. Brigands neither 
aspire to defend the existing political .system nor to create a new one; they 
obey only the guilty desire of obtaining by violence control of the persons 
and possessions of their neighbors. They properly fall, therefore, within 
the jurisdiction of criminal tribunals, and the law of nations is not concerned 
with them. 
3173 



It is a different matter wlien in a state a large party of citizens or sub- 
jects, convinced of the necessitj- of a revolution, or of the .iustice of their 
claims, take up arms, organize themselves in a military manner and oppose 
regular troops to the troops of the government. It can not l)e maintained 
that such an organized body of citizens animated by a political purpose does 
not possess a possible aptitude for the creation of a new state. 

The same principle is laid dowm in Hall's Treatise on Inter- 
national Law, as follows: 

As soon as a considerable population is arrayed in arms with the professed 
object of obtaining political ends it resembles a state too nearly for it to be 
possible to treat individuals belonging to such populations as criminals. It 
would be inhuman for the enemy to execute his prisoners. It would be still 
mf,re inhuman for foreign nations to capture and hang the crews of war 
ships as pirates. Humanity requii-es that the members of such a community 
be treated as belligerents. 

In tlie Institutes of the Law of Nations, Dr. James Lorimer con- 
curs in this view. Dr. Lorimer saj's: 

There is the recognition of the inchoate state as a .iural claimant for sepa- 
rate recognition: that is to say, the acknowledgment of its right to contend 
tor its recognition, or. to borrow a phrase from municipal law, of "its title to 
sue." The'fcrm vvhich recognition usually assumes at this stage is that of a 
concession of belligerent rights. 

The same author thus defines the effects of the recognition of 
belligerency upon the legal status of the insurgents: 

Belligerents have an international existence' for one purpose only, viz. for 
the purpose of fighting and thus ascertaining by the verdict of battle their 
further right to full, tinal recognition. 

Vattel says: 

When a party is formed in a state who no longer obey the sovereign and 
are possessed of sufficient strength to oppose him, this is called a civil war. 

The distinction between a revolutionary military movement 
and organization and an established state is thus clearly stated by 
Bluntschli: 

The quality of belligerents is accorded to armed parties who, without 
having received from an already existing state the right to combat with 
armed forces, have militarily organized themselves and struggle in good 
faith within their own state for a political right. 

In his Lectures on International Law, in referring to cases where 
merely withholding recognition of belligerency necessarily compels 
a foreign power to render material assistance to the mother coun- 
try. Professor Pomeroy states with precision the rule of interna- 
tional law applicable to the peculiar situation with which, in ref- 
ence to the Cuban war, Presidents Cleveland and McKinley have 
had to deal. He says: 

To refuse such recognition [that of belligerency] might, under certain cir- 
cumstances, have the direct effect of causing the state so refusing to take 
the part of the mother country against the rebels. As a consequence, if an- 
other countrv would remain strictly neutral to the contest, that very atti- 
tude would involve the recognition of the insurgents aslielligeronts. L^nless 
another power desires to take active part in the hostilities and throw the 
weight of its influence and, under some circumstances, the positive aid of 
its executive powers in favor of the mother country, it must treat the rebels 
as belligerents. 

Lorimer coincides with Pomeroy: 

By recognizing belligerent rights neutral powers pronounce no judgment 
whatever, either on the merits of the claim or the probaVnlity of its ultimate 
vindication. Belligerent recognition is a mere declaration of impartiality. 
To withhold from'the claimant for recognition the rights of belligerency 
whilst we extend them to the parent state would plainly be to take part in 
the war. 

I submit that had the distinguished writers had in view the case 
of the Cul^an Republic, they could not have laid down a rule more 
completely Mtting it. 
uir.3 



Mr. Chairman, 1 have here presented the law of the case as laid 
down by the leading writers of the civilized nations of both hem- 
ispheres. That it i» the law is incontestable. I defy any gentle- 
man in this Chamber to produce a respectable authority contra- 
vening it. 

The quotation from the message of President Grant which 
formed a part of President McKinley"s message does not call in 
question the principle laid down in the aiithorities I have cited, 
but, on the contrary, sanctions it. 

President Grant stated emphatically that a condition of public 
war did not exist in Cuba, and therefore the insurgents were not 
entitled to recognition. As one fact going to sustain that assertion 
that public war did not exist, he pointed out that the belligerents 
had no seat of government; that in fact no civil government had 
been organized bj- them; and in order to justify Hannaism, Mr. 
McKinley pretends to misunderstand his illustrious predecessor. 
He pretends to believe that President Grant contended that in 
order to justify recognition an organized civil government and a 
capital were necessary, when, in fact. Grant merely mentioned, 
as one thing tending to show that public war did not exist, the 
fact that no civil government and no capital had been established 
bv the insurgents. 

And, Mr. Chairman, the President is not the only offender, for 
better lawyers than Mr. McKinley, in this Chamber and at the 
other end of the Capitol, have found it convenient to adopt the 
hypocritical tactics of their versatile chieftain, and when tlie 
recognition of belligerency has been demanded have replied: "The 
Ciibans have no capital and no organized civil government." 

I forego further comment because my time is limited, but again 
affirm that the authorities I have read sustain as well established 
principles of international law — 

1. If there exists and has existed for over two years in Cuba a 
condition of public war, this country should have recognized the 
belligerency of the revolutionary forces. 

2. If a state of public war has for some time existed in Cuba 
and on account of the proximity of the island to our shores and 
attendant circumstances we could not maintain strict neutrality, 
but must necessarily actively aid Spain until we hail recognized 
the Cubans as belligerents, then, in order that we might remain 
strictly neutral, we not only had the legal right but it was our 
duty to extend such recognition, and to do so would not have 
been an act unfriendly to Spain. 

y. Under conditions legally authorizing such a course, on the 
ground that it is essential to the protection of the interests of a 
foreign power, the recognition of the belligerency of revolted 
colonists, if accompanied by a distinct avowal of a policy of non- 
intervention and followed by strict neutrality, is not necessarily 
an unfriendly act. 

Mr. Chairman, in siipport of the assertion that during the en- 
tire year in which Mr. McKinley has been using our Navy to help 
the Spaniards public war has existed in Cuba, I might call atten- 
tion to acknowledged facts— facts patent to every member of this 
House— showing that the most destructive war the world has ever 
known has been in progress in the unhappy little island; a war, Mr. 
Chairman, which, according to reports unquestionably authentic, 
has already cost Cuba, with her small population, a larger number 
of lives than the aggregate death roll of the Army of tliis great 
country in all the wars it has ever engaged in— more lives than 
817.3 



were lost in the war of the Revolution , the war of 1812. the Mexican 
war. the war of the rebellion, and a century of conflict with the 
aborigines; and I include in the estimate as well our soldiers who 
died of wounds and disease as those who fell in battle. 

Sir, how inexplicable it is that amid this carnival of death, this 
remorseless destruction of a race, in response to the American 
people's demands for justice for the Cubans, we have been told by 
the executive that ^^pains legions are confronted, not by an army 
fighting for the attainment of a political end, but by mere rioters. 

Tliink of it! Two hundred thousand Spanish sokliers iniable to 
suppress a riot! Two hundred thousand Spanish sokliers, operat- 
ing in a country comprising only 41,000 square miles of territory, 
held at bay for three years and mewed up in the cities and sea- 
ports by an unorganized rabble of lawltreahers, by forces so in- 
consequential as not to be entitled to be called an army or have 
their desperate struggle for liberty characterized as war! 

And, Mr. Chairman, it should be borne in mind that for over 
two years Spain has held possession of less than one-half of the 
island, and that by a tenure so precarious that in order to main- 
tain it her armies have been driven to measures more cruel than 
the bloody tactics of savage warfare. Unable to successfully in- 
vade the territory held by the insurgents, suffering continually 
from raids of the revolutionary forces, which have repeatedly so 
closely approached the capital as to creafea reign of terror within 
the very shadow of Morro Castle, the Spaniards long ago ceased 
to make war upon the armed insurgents and began the systematic 
assassination of noncombirtants. 

To maintain their feeble hold upon garrisoned cities they have 
burned the habitations of the people, reduced the provinces occu- 
pied by their troops to a wilderness incapable of sustaining human 
life, and turned loose upon the defenseless, unarmed peasantry an 
army of butchers, who, day and night, have reveled in carnage. 
Matchless, indeed, is the valor of the braves who have withstood 
this savage onslaught, who, notwithstanding Spain's resort to 
these fiendish measures, continue the struggle against frightful 
odds, determined to drive the Spaniard from the'shores or share 
the fate of their murdered kinsmen, 

Mr. Chairman, modern history records no such hideous savagerv 
as has characterized Spain's war upon the Cubans. They have 
assassinated political prisoners in their cells, shot suspects con- 
victed of imaginary political offenses by drumhead courts-mar- 
tial, butchered the unarmed pacificos in their fields and cabins, 
bayoneted sick soldiers in their cots, and to this horrible violence 
and ruthless biitchery have added the atrocity of consigning hun- 
dreds of thousands of men, women, and children, guiltless of par- 
ticipation in the conflict, to death from starvation! 

Sir, against the inhabitants of the island, those in arms and 
those engaged in peaceful pursuits, regardless of age, sex. or con- 
dition, every instrumentality capable of destroying human life 
has been employed, until Cuba's death roll certainly exceeds half 
a million, and yet from the camps of Gomez and Garcia comes 
the battle cry with which Patrick Henry electrified the world. 
"Give us liberty or give us death!"' Never has the world wit- 
nessed heroism more sublime, contending against diabolism more 
repulsive. 

And Spain tells us that these crimes, so appalling that had they 
been committed by the devils in hell they would" have been re- 
buked by Satan, are necessary to the suppression of a mere riot. 

3173 



8 

The President of the United States and his spokesmen in Con- 
gress, when asked to place Cuba upon an equality with her tor- 
ipenter by recognizing belligerency, have told us that because they 
huve no established capital, no fully organized civil government, 
armed forces which for three years have successfully resisted and 
which continue to oppose the assassins are not, in contemplation 
of international law, belligerents. Shame, oh, shame upon this 
pettifogger's plea! 

Mr. chairman, to the appalling panorama of violence which 
I have depicted the Democrats in this Chamber have pointed — 
upon it alone I might continue to rely — to prove that Cuba has 
been for nearly three years the theater of a public war. But I pre- 
fer not to rest the case on even the overwhelming testimony that 
has been furnished from day to day by the tragical and bloody 
annals of the struggle. 

I have said that a number of the authorities I have cited upon 
the question of international law involved were presented to tho 
House two years ago by a distinguished Republican member. 
Having availed myself of this source of assistance in presenting 
the law of the case, I now summon to my assistance, in laying be- 
fore the House the facts as to the nature of the struggle in Cuba, 
another eminent Republican, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Hitt]. He is the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 
and therefore his superior facilities for ascertaining the facts 
should render his evidence as to the military operations in Cuba 
of the highest value. He is profoundly versed in international 
law and has had extensive experience in diplomacy, and therefore 
his opinion as to what is the duty of his Government is entitled 
to unquestioning respect. 

Nearly two years ago the war in Cuba was imder consideration 
in this Chamber, and the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hitt] had 
the floor. Listen to what he said on that occasion: 

First, as to the belligerency of the Cubans, if that is a fact, a truth, we 
may recognize it; if it is not, if it is a falsehood, wo ought not to recog- 
nize it under any circumstances. Now, let us see what are the facts. That 
tliere is a state of war, that there is belligerency, can hardly be denied in 
view of the overwhelming evidence of a state of war. That it is a fact ia 
shown by many things more than mere newspaper reports. The official re- 
ports of our consuls lying before the members of the House for weeks show 
the growth and extent of the war now raging in Cuba. 

ior-T^^?.''*'™»gle is not a reproduction of the ten years' insurrection of ISOSto 
lS/8. Par from it— far more than that. On the i:5th day of ,TuIy tho consuls 
report that the armed forces then in the field, contending with desperate 
earnestness and unconquerable will, were three times greater than the 
men engaged m the rebellion of 1868-1878 when at the height of its power 
and the tide of war has gone on since that time and swept on over the island 
trom one side and one end to the other, until to-day the Spanish authority is 
not in fact exercised over more than one-third, probably not more than one- 
tourth, of the 41,000 square miles of surface of the Island of Culw. The Span- 
ish minister made public a statement on tho 22d day of February, with his 
name signed to it, published to the people of the United States, in which he 
says that 13o,0()0 troops have been sent to the Island of Cuba by Spain. 

Is not that war? Is that a police force putting down a street disturbance? 
******* 

Recently the Captain-General ot Cuba issued two long proclamations, which 
all ot you have read, and doubtless read with horror, in connection with the 
news that accompanied it, which contained detailed regulations and prescrip- 
tions concerning this war in the very terms and spirit of the orders issued by 
JNapoleon when he commanded the greatest forces ever enlisted in modern 
warfare Ihe Captam-General recognized the condition of war prevailing, 
bo, too, trom the headquarters of the Spanish ministry dispatches are sent out 
constantly referring to two or three engagements nearly every day with the 

******* 
It will not do to say that this is mere guerrilla wai-fare. We can not pro- 
scribe the way m which men do their fighting or in which they are to be 
3173 



9 

organized in governments or in which they live. Guerrilla warfare is a great 
and tremendoiis instrument, and the genius of the Spanish race has shown in 
their history that it is their resistless, deadly, and desperate resort in times 
of emergency and that it is a system that caii not readily be subdued. 

One iTundred and fifty thousand of the finest French soldiers that Napo- 
leon ever commanded marched into Spain, took possession of its cities, as the ■ 
Spanish troops have taken possession of the Cuban cities, and assumed 
thereby to subdue a people wlio cuuld only resist by means of guerrilla war- 
fare. But what was the result? Guerrilla warfare destroyed that splendid 
army. And it was the defeat and destruction of Kapoleon's forces in that 
mighty war, conducted by this harassing and irregular system, that de- 
prived him of his resources, so that after the liual blow in the retreat from 
Moscow that greatest power of modern times crumbled and fell. 

Mr. Chairman , the gentleman who delivered this excellent speech 
is now and was when he delivered it chairman of the Committee 
on Foreign Affairs. He had unusual facilities for ascertaining 
the facts; we all know how familiar he is with the law. What 
gentleman on his committee or on the other side of the Chamber 
will call in question this lucid digest of the history of Cuba's 
struggle for liberty, this cogent concept of the law of the case, 
this appeal for the performance of the nation's duty? 

But let us follow the gentleman a little further. He gives his 
estimate of the value of the right which he says and I say has 
been unjustly withheld from the Cuban patriots. I invite partic- 
ular attention to the fact that the gentleman from Illinois concurs 
w^ith me in saying that this country has been an effective ally of 
Spain. 

In the midst of his powerful plea for the recognition of bellig- 
erency in this Chamber two years ago he was asked by a sympa- 
thetic listener on the Republican side of the Chamber to tell the 
House and the country what benefits Cuba would derive from 
such recognition. Here is his answer: 

Pronounce that magic word "belligerency ! " Recognize those as belliger- 
ents who are truly belligerents, who are carrying on war, and you at once give 
them that advantage and that status among nations in our ports. The word 
"belligerency" exactly defines and describes what they are doin^— they are 
carrying on war. Recognize them as belligerents and you enable them at 
once to do all that other nations are entitled to do— to carry a flag, to pur- 
chase in our markets munitions of war and supplies of every kind, to pur- 
chase them openly and take them out openly, .just as the Spanish Govern- 
ment now does— not hiding and skulking in obscure and distant ports by 
night to escape seizure, dogged every hour by spies and informers to give 
notice to our Government and have them arrested. Then men could go 
openly to join them, if not in armed expeditions. They could negotiate loans 
and sell bonds just as the Spanish Government is doing now. 

Mr. Chairman, boiled down, the gentleman's statement mean3 
that conditions which prevailed in Cuba when Mr. McKinley be- 
came President rendered it the duty of the United States to rec- 
ognize the belligerency of the revolutionists. Why was recogni- 
titm denied? 

It was pointed out by IMr. Hitt that to withhold recognition 
made this great Republic an ally of the Spaniards. Why did the 
President make our Navy an auxiliary of the forces commanded 
by Weyler? 

Spain has come into our markets, bought supplies, and shipped 
them to Cuba, while the Cubans, or those who desire to help their 
cause, have been compelled to "skulk," " hide,'' have been ' ' dogged 
every hour by spies and informers " appointed for the purpose by 
the Administration, and if detected in doing things freely per- 
mitted to Spain's agents, have by order of our Government been 
arrested and thrown into prison. American war ships have 
guarded our ports to prevent vessels from conveying supplies to 
31 r3 



10 

the Cubans, while Spanish ships have been graciotisly received, 
going and coming at their pleasure, laden with the sinews of war. 

Boiled down, 1 say, the gentleman's statement means that pub- 
lic war existed in Cuba two years ago, that it has existed ever 
since, that it exists now, a war between men fighting for inde- 
pendence and liberty and an alien army of assassins, and that the 
United States has not remained neutral, because without the 
recognition of Cuban belligerency neutrality was impossible. 
Instead of remaining neutral we have furnished arms, munitions, 
and provisions with which to kill the Cubans, and gun cotton with 
which to destroy our ships and murder our seamen. 

Mr. Chairman, over two years ago this House passed almost 
unanimously a resolution favoring the recogiiition of Cuban 
belligerency. It thereby solemnly declared that in its .iudgment 
civil war, not a mere riot, prevailed in Cuba. If war prevailed 
two years ago, I repeat, sir, it has x)revailed ever since— it pre- 
vails now. 

Why has this Chamber refused to pass the pending resolution 
which merely and only recognizes this fact? 

During these two years the United States have been in partner- 
ship with the Spaniards. Why have the Republicans in this 
Chamber, by refusing to recognize belligerency, acquiesced in the 
continuance of this partnership? 

Mr. McKinley knew that long before the day of his inaugura- 
tion the evidences of the existence of a public war in Cuba, so 
forcibly i~)resented by the gentleman from Illinois and so unhesi- 
tatingly accepted by this House, were in possession of the execu- 
tive department of the Government, and the members of this 
House know that from that day until this evidence of the fact 
has been accumulating. But, following the path pointed out by 
Hannaism, the President has not only permitted the slaughter to 
go on, but has made this great Rei)ublic a helper in the bloody 
work which has horrified mankind, and the ma.iority in this Cham- 
ber has by silence and inaction set the seal of approval upon the 
policy of the Administration. 

Mr. Chairman, who is responsible for this di.sgraceful neglect 
of the nation's duty? What influences have tjeen siifficiently 
powerful in the inner circles of Government to parah'ze the con- 
science and the arm of the Executive and stifle the convictions of 
the representatives of the people? 

Mr. Chairman, for months there has been pending before our 
Committee on Foreign Relations a Senate joint resolution recog- 
nizing the belligerency of the Cuban revolutionists. It has been 
held in the committee room to prevent us from acting upon it. 
It was there when De Lome denounced the President as a "coarse 
politician. " It was there when the Spaniards destroyed the Maine 
and murdered 2GG of our seamen. 

Why has that resolution not been acted upon by the committee 
and reported to the House? 

Four hundred thousand noncombatants have been murdered by 
the Spaniards since that resolution came from the Senate to this 
House. Sir, who doubts that its prompt passage by this body 
would long ago have ended the Cuban war and saved a majority 
of these victims of Spanish savagery from their awful fate? 

And how the President and managers of Spain's campaign have 
played with the majority in this House! Why, the President sent 
the Maine to Havana as a means of pacifying what his friend 
Mark Hanna calls "the Republican jingoes" in the House of 

3173 



11 

Representatives. The gentlemen were growing weary of tlio gag, 
and to prevent agitation on the Republican side of this Chamber 
in favor of the recog-nition of belligerency, a battle ship was sent 
to Havana. Accounts of the enterprise which appeared in the 
Administration newspapers were warlike in tone. They were for 
home consumption. Abroad it was represented that nothing waa 
further from the President's intention than intervention, and this 
was the fact. The destruction of a battle ship and the murder of 
206 of our seamen was the penalty paid for an expedition planned 
by demagogues as a means of pacifying Republican Congressmen 
who had grown restless under the censiare of their constituents. 

To send the Maine to Havana for such a purpose was dis- 
griiceful; to anchor her in the harbor, within reach of an army of 
assassins, commanded by officers who sanction the murder of 
women and sucking babes, was to invite destruction. 

Sir, I repeat that had the belligerency resolution been passed ten 
months ago. the Cuban war would have been ended long since, 
saving the lives of thousands who have been murdered, including 
the gallant seamen of the Maine. I believe the American people 
are of this opinion, and that they will know how to deal with those 
responsible for the burial of the belligerency resolution in the 
archives of the committee room. 

The voters of this country know that notwithstanding the tre- 
mendous tide of public sentiment in favor of prompt action the 
President, the State Department, our Committee on Foreign Re- 
lations, and the Republican majority in the House of Representa- 
tives have composedly witnessed the performance of the bloody 
and sickening drama of Cubas immolation, and they know what 
influences have dictated this monstrous policy. 

If evidence upon which to convict the Administration of bow- 
ing to the will of the stockjobbers is demanded, I need not use his 
political adversaries as witnesses. The Coxgressional Record, 
in the reported speeches of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hitt] , 
tells the whole story. He is the President's personal and political 
friend. His known probity and conservatism, his uniform and 
punctilious adherence to paths befitting a high order of states- 
manship, his sturdy abhorrence of imfair assaults upon "our 
business interests," preclude the suspicion that he thoughtlessly 
or without sufficient gi'ounds to justify it made the accusation 
contained in a speech delivered by him in this Chamber nearly 
two years ago. According to Mr. Hitt the stockjobbers alone 
have tied the hands of this Republic and consigned the Cubans 
to destruction. Hear him: 

That question of recognizing Cuban belligerency is the one on which the 
American people have been iixing their attention most earnestly. This 
House has been flooded with petitions and memorials by thousands— by leg- 
islatures, chambers of commerce, societies, from churches, from associations 
of every kind, and from individual citizens by tens of thousands— your com- 
mittee room has been choked with them. There is no other subject for years 
on which thei-e has been so vast and multitudinous an expression of the peo- 
ple's will as this question of recognizing the belligerency of the Cubans who 
are struggling for freedom. They go to the very heart of the question. 
The people know just what is most wanted and they ask us to do it. 

Some individuals, generally those who call themselves business men, bro- 
kers, and financial men. write us letters deprecating action of any kind, op- 
posing any agitation or discussion on any foreign question that may disturb 
the market. They are not in favor of the Spaniard: they are not in favor of 
the Cuban; they care nothing whatever for either side. They simply depre- 
cate any acti(m which will affect the markets in which their hearts are bound 
up. But the unmistakable voice of the people of the United States, as ex- 

ressed in the enorrootis majority given in this House a month ago— :itK to 

r— and in the Senate— 64 to 6— is in favor of immediately recognizing the bel- 
ligerency of the Cubans. 
3173 



F; 



12 

Mr. Chairman, this statement, based upon facts known to all of 
us, but best known to members of the committee to whom tho 
people's petitions for prompt action, as well as the stockjobbers' 
protests against any action whatever, have been atldressed, must 
be accepted as correct. It concurs with what is in everybody's 
mouth and v/ith the newspaper reports of current events. 

It fixes the responsibility for the Cuban policy of the Adminis- 
tration. 

It tells us why the rights of belligerency have been withheld 
from the Cubans— why our Navy has been used as an auxiliary of 
the Spanish butchers. 

Nobody will dispute its accuracy. 

In it is epitomized the story of the recreancy of two Presidents, 
of the subserviency of one of the most important conmiittees of 
this body, of the puissance of the bureaucracy which has usurped 
the prerogatives of the House of Representatives and converted 
its majority into tethered puppets, who are content to sit still or 
dance accordingly as their master frowns or pulls the string. 

Startling, humiliating, disgraceful as it is, the recital of the 
gentleman from Illinois tells the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing l)ut the truth. 

Had a member on this side of the Chamber made such a state- 
ment, he would have been arraigned as a "jingo;"' but nobody 
will make this charge against the chairman of the Committee on 
Foreign Affairs. When Democrats have demanded justice for 
Cuba and barely intimated that Hannaism was the obstruction to 
prompt action, they have been accused of ' ' playing politics;" but 
nobody will accuse the chairman of the Foreign Relations Com- 
mittee of "playing politics." 

Conservatism in all things is his most notable characteristic, 
and he is known to be especially conservative in matters relating 
to the foreign policy of the Government. He is not one of the 
critics of what have been called trust methods in politics— methods 
•which many believe are rapidly substituting the rule of plutoc- 
racy for republicanism and deiuocracy— and therefore his re- 
marks will not be called those of an anarchist or as an assault upon 
"our business interests." He is conspicuous alike in the ranks 
of those famous for conservatism and in the leadership of the 
Hannaized Republican party— a leadership wdiich seemingly glo- 
ries in the fact that party management, diplomacy, and the busi- 
ness of "governing," like nearly everything else "in the country, 
has been syndicated and placed under control of the Hannas and 
Elkinses. 

By this distinguished gentleman we are told that the committee 
room has been "choked" with petitions praying for the recogni- 
tion of belligerency— petitions from legislatures, from towns and 
cities, from civil and religious societies and associations, from 
chambers of commerce, from tens of thousands of individuals, in- 
dicating a multitudinous demand of the people for the dissolution 
of our partnership with the Spanish butchers; and that opposed 
to this " multitudinous expression of the peoi)le"s will" are "some 
individuals" who " call themselves businessmen," — stock jobbers, 
and speculators, who are not the friends of either Cuba or Spain, 
who "care nothing for either side," but " who deprecate every 
action " that might " disturb the market in which their hearts are 
bound up." 

Mr. Chairman, the American people coincide with the gentle- 
man from Illinois in the belief that the President's Cuban^'policy 
3173 



13 

lias been approved by the stockjobbers and condemned by the 
remainder of manldnd. The chairman of the Committee on For- 
eign Affairs and the members of the committee know that their 
committee room has been "choked" by petitions, indicating a 
"multitudinous" demand for prompt action, while only "some 
individuals" whose "hearts are wrapped uj) in the markets" are 
opposed to it, yet the belligerency resolution has remained in the 
committee room until, unaided, single-handed, but at an awful 
sacrifice of life, the Cubans have weil-nigh achieved their inde- 
pendence. 

Mr. Chairman, it has been said in explanation of the action of 
the committee in pigeonholing this resolution that it deals with 
a matter with which the Executive and not the Legislature should 
deal. But this view did not authorize the committee to smother 
the suT)ject in the committee room. 

Do the members of the committee imagine that they are charged 
with the duty of finally determining absolutely this or any other 
question connected with the matter? 

Is this body or its committees to pass finally upon questions of 
policy and propriety? If it is the opinion of a majority of the 
committee that the President should be allowed to ignore a plain 
public duty, by disregarding "multitudinous" petitions of the 
people, and follow the advice of the stockj.obbers, such a view 
would authorize an adverse report by the committee, but it af- 
fords no shadow of justification for making no report whatever. 

The chairman of the committee and a majority of its members 
may regard the Cuban war as a matter with which the Congress 
has no right to intermeddle. I know there are gentlemen who 
contend that the recognition of belligerency is a matter exclu- 
sively committed to the Executive; but let me remind gentlemen 
that the powers of this House are conferred by the Constitu- 
tion and can not without impropriety be abridged by committees. 
Committees are not supposed to act as censors of the body they 
serve. In my opinion, Congress not only possesses the legal power 
to dispose of the question but it was its duty to do so promptly. 

Here and here only, in the Congress, rests the power to deter- 
mine peace and war, and in this imperial prerogative are included 
all lesser kindred powers, the exercise of which is essential to the 
maintenance of the dignity, honor, and safety of the Republic. 

The opinion that Congress ought not to iutorlere, no matter 
what the delinquencies of the Executive, might properly have 
led to an adverse report of the committee, but no possible view of 
the matter can justify the committee in making no report at all, 
and thus effectively disfranchising the House of Representatives. 

Mr. SULZER. Does not the gentleman think we ought to rec- 
ognize the indoppudence of Cuba? 

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. I do not. Spain would not 
promi)tly resent such a step, and might not resent it at all. What 
then? Why the war would go on lor mouths longer. Nothing 
short of a notice to Spain to quit forever pretensions to sovereignty 
in the Western Hemisphere will meet the reqiiirements of the sit- 
uation as it exists to-day. The butchers must be driven from 
Cul)a. Mere resolutions recognizing political conditions will not 
suffice. 

If we are to go no further than such measures as will give to 

the Cubans the rights of lawful belligerency, then I would prefer 

the adoption of the Senate resolution to which I have referred. 

The adoption of this resolution nine or ten months ago by this 

3173 



14 

House would have so strengthened the hands of the Cubans that 
Spain would have been driven from the island long ago. Pass 
that resolution now, and within six weeks the flag of free Cuba 
will float over Morro Castle. 

As to the recognition of Cuban independence, if such a step is 
to be taken, let me warn all true friends of the patriots that when 
they shall have passed through the ordeal of fire and blood which, 
in the providence of God, is the only avenue to liberty, they will 
be confronted with fresh dangers. Having vanquished the Span- 
iard, they will face another foe. The holders of Spanish bonds 
will be on hand to insist upon saddling upon the Cubans the obli- 
gations incurred by the Spaniards in carrying ou the war of 
extermination. 

Mr. Chairman, this country has occasion to recall with shame 
its participation in the slaughter of 600,000 inhabitants of the 
Island of Cuba. The blackened ruins of their homes, the return 
of millions of fertile acres to a state of natiire, the spectacle of an 
army of winged A'ultures preying upon the remains of unburied 
victims of Spanish violence — such, sir, is the horrible picture 
which will greet the eyes of the Cuban soldier when peace with in- 
dependence shall reward the unparalleled valor of the followers of 
Gomez. Time and labor will efface the mementos of the ravages 
of war visible in the blighted landscape. The martyred dead can 
not be restored to life. Future generations will treasure memory 
of their sacrifices and bedew their sacred graves with tears. Let 
us see to it that in the final settlement between Spain and the 
Cubans not a penny of the expense incurred by the butcher 
dynasty in the war of extermination is imposed upon a people 
who. God knows, have suffered enough, and who ought not to 
be compelled to pay the expenses incurred in the attempt to exter- 
minate them. 

Mr. Chairman , I can not refrain from referring briefly to another 
respect in which the views of the Republican President and his 
supporters on this floor are vulnerable to criticism and censure. 
The President seems to entertain the opinion that upon him de- 
volves the responsibility of determining when and in what man- 
ner, if at all. the United States shall intervene in the Cuban 
struggle. Under the Constitution he possesses no authority to 
intervene by force of arms. To take such a step would be to levy 
w^ar upon Spain. The Congress, not the President, is authorized 
to declare war. 

The Cubans have not reqtiested the United States to intervene. 
They have said over and over again during the past two years 
that if the United States would accord them belligerent rights 
and cease to act as an ally of the mother country they could drive 
the Spaniards into the sea and achieve the independence of their 
country. 

Why is it, Mr. Chairman, that the President withholds the con- 
cession of belligerent rights, and that he and his supporters are 
continually referring to intervention as the policy in contempla- 
tion in Administration circles? 

I confess, sir, that I distrust those who are known tohave supreme 
influence at the White House to such an extent that I fear inter- 
vention would result in constituting this Government the attorney 
for the prosecution of the claims of holders of Spanish bonds. The 
achievement of independence by the Cubans without intervention, 
which they could have achieved long ago had we recognized bel- 
ligerency, would have left them to settle all scores with Spain, and 

3173 



15 

it would have been impossible for the Spaniards to saddle upon 
the young Republic an unbearable burden of debt. 

I believe that with this Government in the hands of Hannaized 
Republican politicians— the fat-fryers who raised the McKinley 
campaign fund, and those who furnished it — intervention may 
mean peace, purchased by the Cubans at an expense of hundreds 
of millions, and that should we permit this monstrous imposition, 
Cuba, bleeding from a thousand gaping wounds, almost depopu- 
lated and rendered desolate by the ravages of the war, would face 
the future burdened with a bonded debt so large as to consign not 
only this generation, but the generations to come, to hopeless pov- 
erty. 

Mr. Chairman, I have felt called upon to thus unreservedly 
present my views concerning the Cuban policy of the Adminis- 
tration because I believe that, in violation of international law 
and in contravention of the will of the jieople of this country, for 
two years justice — the recognition of belligerency — has been 
withheld from the Cubans. 

Because I believe that this neglect of duty is attributable to the 
undue influences of the class so accurately described by the gen- 
tleman from Illinois [Mr. Hitt] , in the speech from which I have 
quoted — a class generally called stockjobbers. 

Because, with the gentleman from Illinois. I believe that recog- 
nition of belligerency would have materially strengthened the 
hands of the insurgents, and since they have maintained them- 
selves and even won decided advantages over the Spaniards with- 
out this help, I believe that with it ere this they would have 
driven the Spaniards from the island. 

Because, as was so convincingly stated by the gentleman from 
Illinois, failing to recognize Cuban belligerency, we have not re- 
mained neutral, but have been the helpers of Spain in a war of 
extermination waged by an army of savages upon noncombatants, 
and have not only refused to rescue but have helped to destroy 
the victims of this appalling crusade. 

Because I believe that had this Republic performed its duty and 
recognized belligerency a year ago, war with Spain, which now 
impends, could have been avoided. 

Because I regard the fifty millions recently appropriated and 
the loss of the Maine and her crew as in the nature of penalties 
and sacrifices paid and suffered on account of the wretched and 
inhuman policy inaugurated by Mr. Cleveland and followed by 
Mr. McKinley, at the instance of men "whose hearts are wrapped 
up in the markets"' and in whose ej-es national honor, humanity, 
and even the lives of 000,000 men, women, and children are of 
less consequence than the gambling transactions of the "bulls" 
and " bears " and the bond speculations of the financiers who fur- 
nished the money with which to equip the armies that have made 
fair and fertile Cuba the saddest and most desolate spot on the 
footstool. 

Because, notwithstanding the fact that an appropriation of fifty 
millions has been made preparatory to the forcible expulsion of 
the Sx)aniards from this hemisphere, these stockjobbers are still 
hopefully at work, and. unless Congress remains in session to x)re- 
vent it, may yet succeed in frustrating the will of the peoijle. 

Because it is being said that Congress will soon adjourn — prob- 
ably as early as April 15, certainly not later than May 15 — leaving 
the President to settle the Cuban question in his own way, and I 
do not like the President's "way." Up to this time he has pur- 
3173 



HBKHKY Uh CUNUKtbb 



013 902 140 p 



16 

sued Cleveland's "way,"' Mark Hanna's "way," Colonel Mc- 
Cook's "way,'' the stockjobbers' "way." I want him to try the 
people's way, humanity's way, God's way. I want my country to 
do its duty. Congress will be adjourned? By whom':' The Presi- 
dent will "be alloAved to settle the question, will he? 

What right has the President to "settle" the question of 
whether peace or war shall be America's remedy for the assassina- 
tion of 26G of her seamen? To adjourn and leave the imbroglio 
with Spain unsettled would be an abdication of the highest pre- 
rogative of the legislative body — the right to determine between 
peace and war. 

I am opposed to it. The country should be notified of tlie pro- 
gramme. I would say to the President. "Take the initiative, if 
j'ou will, in a movement for liberation of Cuba, and ixnited Amei'- 
ica will be at your back. There will be no North, no South, no 
East, no West, no Democrats, no Republicans, no Populists. But 
understand that, by the Eternal, Cuba shall be free." 

1 would serve notice on all concerned that the United States 
will see to it that the Cubans are not coerced into paying for the 
implements of war with which thousands have been killed, or for 
the services of the army of demons by whom thousands more have 
been confined in stockades to die of starvation. 

IMr. Chairman, we all know that when the end of the war is 
reached the demand Avill be made that the Cubans shall paj' not 
only the exj^ense incurred by them in the desperate struggle for 
liberty, but also the expenses incurred by their oppressors. I do 
not believe the American Congress would sanction or permit this 
monstrous injustice, and if any such i^rogramme is on foot, it 
accounts for the fact that somebody has fixed the day for the 
adjournment of this body. We should remain in session until 
Cuba is free if it takes all summer. [Applause.] 
3173 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



'0013902 140 A • 



HoUinger Corp. 
pH8.5 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

iiii'iiMii!!ur!"riii'llillfiM 



013 902 140 A • 



HolUnger Corp. 
pH8.5 



